Pages

18.3.16

Mother India, Papa Patriots and Black Sheep

“Bharat Mata ki Jai (Hail Mother India)” sounds like a war
cry. In the past few days it has indeed become one. For me, the slogan is
associated with Eastman colour films and rising fascism in the political
landscape. The phrase also sounds treacly and a bit of a burden on the nation’s
maternal bosom to nurse 1.26 billion people, many of whom are sucking her dry.

There is no reason for nationalism to mimic a soap opera
where a bunch of stooges of patriarchy prop up the mama country on a pile of
shaky bricks, bricks that are being marked to build a temple. National pride in
this scheme comes not from welfare schemes but by sanctifying spiritual
symbols. Rightwing groups now want the cow to be declared the mother of the
nation; six people attempted suicide for this demand.

India is getting transformed into a place of worship. On his
first day in office, Prime Minister Narendra Modi touched his forehead on the
steps of Parliament and referred to the Constitution as his holy book. Every
attempt is made to convey that the country has a certain religion. When a
country has a religion – and nationalism is seen as a religion – many a
charlatan will claim to save it.

The head of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS), an
organisation that has no locus standi and yet dictates the policies of the
government, declares: “Now the time has come when we have to tell the new
generation to chant ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’. It should be real, spontaneous and
part of all-round development of the youth.”

When fascists speak of spontaneity it is assumed that they
will ensure it is done. MP and All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM)
Chief Asaduddin Owaisi categorically stated
that he would not chant the slogan even if a knife was put to his throat. The
response of senior leaders has been to shame the ‘anti-nationals’, making them
out to be separatists who should be shunted from the country. The Shiv Sena
wants to revoke citizenship and voting rights of those who do not repeat the
mother mantra.

There should be more people challenging this. The need to
hail the country arises when there is a war or a calamity. This tugging at the
mater’s apron strings during normal times, that too in the Assembly, is a
kneejerk attempt at scoring points. Owaisi’s legalistic justification that “Nowhere
in the Constitution it says that one should say: Bharat Mata ki Jai”, is not a
strong enough rejoinder. Fidelity is an emotion; it is not a leash to fetter
the dog with.

Gestures of obeisance may be antithetical to an individual’s
personality, ideology or faith.But even
before a Muslim in India might try and explain such concerns, those who flaunt
their “Hindu nationalism”, as though they own the country by virtue of their
birth, will scream sedition.

The use of the term ‘Bharat Mata’ is far from innocent. The
concept of Mother Earth for the majoritarian narrative is linked not to the
soil that the farmers till but a hydra-limbed goddess who will destroy any
opposition, even if it is an apparition in the form of ‘others’. Kitschy posters of Mother India superimposed
on the map follow this prototype. However, when artist M.F.Husain painted Mother
India as a nude woman in the shape of a map with state names he was
chastised for “hurting Hindu sentiments”. Deference to deities seen as
patriotism seems to be the norm.

***

Umar Khalid shaved off his
beard, a beard more like a salute to Che than to any mullah. “For the first
time I discovered my Muslim identity,” he said. “He is playing the Muslim
card,” they said. They who have been playing the Hindu card, they who want
education to follow ancient scriptures, they who believe that what today’s
science is doing is all there in the Vedas, they who have held the country to
ransom on the basis of a temple. For many of us discovery of our religious
identity came through such pummeling. Mine happened after the Bombay riots of
1992-93 following the demolition of the Babri Masjid; Umar Khalid’s happened
now. It is painful, always.

Umar has been arrested for
sedition in the JNU
case of February 9 where he has been charged with organising a rally on
campus in support of Afzal Guru, who was hanged to death for his role in the
Parliament attack of 2001. [This has been described
as a judicial killing by activists and lawyers.] Guru is considered a martyr in
Kashmir. At the rally, there were slogans: We will destroy India. We will fight
India. We will break India into bits. Such slogans are common in the valley.

Initially, when Umar had gone
underground, his father told the media, “My son is a communist, he does not even
practise his religion.” Had he been a Hindu it might have been a different
story. Had he been an upper caste Hindu, he could even write a column stating
that he is an “anti-national” but a proud Hindu, as TV anchor Rajdeep Sardesai
indeed dramatically did.

The only opinions a Muslim in
India is expected to express are on jihad (obviously that you are against it)
or the ghettos (where you might not live). You are expected to be a part of the
mainstream but you dare not question that mainstream. If you ever do, then be
sure that only the voice of the privileged majority can save you. You can fly
only under the wings of Hindu samaritans.

In the mock
courtroom TV show, the host made it clear to Bollywood superstar Aamir Khan
that he should not be complaining about intolerance
because he had acted in PK,
a film that “insulted Hindu gods”. [Truth is that it called out frauds of all
faiths.] He then emphasised how despite this the large-hearted majority
community had made the film a hit. The nation is dressed up as an idol and 80 per
cent of the population acts as priest offering the minorities an opportunity
for retribution.

Aamir Khan capitulated. He listed out his essential goodness
by mentioning his Hindu wife, and ex wife, and his family tree dotted with
Hindus. He then folded his hands and apologised. It was a searing moment. It
made me angry. It reminded me of the picture of another man pleading with
folded hands to be spared during the Gujarat riots. The actor probably did it
to ensure his space as a public figure; the anonymous man did it to survive,
invisibly.

***

What happens to the angst of
the initial bold statements? The rebels, whether they are actors or MPs or
students or writers, are using a faulty blueprint that reads: we do not want
freedom from India, but freedom within India. The student leaders and teachers
explain away their concept of ‘azaadi’ as “freedom from hunger” and “freedom
from WTO”. This is the sort of obfuscation that institutions revel in. It is
especially unfortunate as this was done as a response to the anti-nationalism
charge for supporting Kashmir; soon the martyrs of a university, who were being
sacrificed due to ‘those masked men’ who do terrible things like raising
anti-India slogans, replaced the martyrs of Kashmir.

But the real wakeup call comes
from the masked dissidents because they have to protect a tangible territory
and not belief systems with different levels of opiate. Kashmir does not
consider itself Indian. Kashmiris show up on polling day to vote for the least
despicable candidate, one who might not get coopted by the Indian state. The
exaggerated sentiments come from having had their state torn to bits in a land
of unmarked graves and half widows. This is not the reality of Mumbai or Delhi
or the cities where we live. We seek other freedoms.

The India in which states refuse to speak the national
language, and have even broken up into two, has still not grasped the concept
of dissent, which is why the rebels begin to sing paeans to the nation the
moment they are caught with fists in the air. This negates the basis of
dissent. Challenging nationalism is not only valid, but essential. In a free
society, it is imperative to be free of any blind and stifling allegiance. The
nation is an idea, an abstraction; our response is personal. No government or
political party can define it for us.

The question of freedom is complex
because issues outside the realm of social and armed conflict have become politicised
too. Patriotism, therefore, often means suffering from the xenophobia of the
political leaders and/or their supremacist ideals.

A nation cannot be free if its
people are poodles chained to an acceptable idea of freedom.

Translate

A closer look

Writes. Rights.
From on-field journalism to armchair critique. Words are a weapon, they are also a shield.
Also, a frustrated artist. A frustrated singer. A frustrated gourmand. A frustrated photographer. This helps. It adds pathos to the plebeian.
I have a healthy disregard for objectivity.